10 Responses to The Core Motions

1. laurie urane says:

   27 March, 2011 at 12:52 pm

   my uncle was a good friend of ben cgifly The labour party is hopeless athe the moment It awondr more didid not lose their seats. It needs more ministers for bustops , ie local members that turn up at branch meetinge and are interested in their local area It need to concentrate on public transport, we once borowed for infracture , this crap of balanced budgets comes from US proposition 13 years ago NSW once borrowre milliions for infrastrautue and we are still alive Just been to europe and even small towns have trams , exelent trains and buses why we cannot do it I dont know . there are no nigt trains except Brisban and melbourne , what trains there are are ancient We wast time and money ordering from Chin awhen there are perfectly good european makere Even the old eu trains a re better than hours , we sgould buy their second hand ons There is a lot more to be done for transport

   Reply
2. Geoff Robinson says:

   28 March, 2011 at 4:41 pm

   I would amend your motion to require that union delegates be elected by PR given low turnout in most union elections the winning ticket in any union election could sweep conference delegate elections.

   Reply
   • benaveling says:

     28 March, 2011 at 8:22 pm

     Hi Geoff,
     We’re trying to keep this version of the motions simple – there is another longer version that covers a lot more of the proposed mechanics, I’ll post the current version of it for your review.
     That version currently doesn’t explicitly specify PR. Instead it relies on Schedule F.1, which specifies PR for any ballot for more than one position. I’d be appreciative if you could have a look at the extended motions and at Schedule F, and see if you think that’s sufficient or not.
     Thanks, Ben

     Reply
     • benaveling says:

       28 March, 2011 at 8:38 pm

       Below is an extended and expanded version of the core motions that might be preferred by some branches. I’m putting it here instead of making a separate post out of it, because I want to make it available to those who want this level of detail, but this is too much detail for the rank and file meeting, and I figure that it is exactly those people who are prepared to read through all that comments and find this that will be the ones that want to go beyond the core motions. Our opinion is that every branch should vary and extend the motions as they see fit, or not, if they’re happy with the core motions.

       1. Endorse the 2010 Review and demand it be implemented in full

       We endorse the findings of the 2010 National Review and demand that its Recommendations be implemented in full.

       2. Intervention in preselections only in genuinely exceptional circumstances.

       We request State Conference to implement the 2010 National Review’s Recommendation 25 in full.  We ask that the party rules be changed so that:
       Rank and file preselections may not be overridden or delayed except in exceptional circumstances. The following are not exceptional circumstances: unproven allegations of branch stacking; star candidates; insufficient time to hold a preselection; desire for balance in gender representation; low membership levels; nor any reasonably foreseeable event. Proven allegations of branch stacking may be grounds for delaying a preselection. The following is exceptional circumstances: no nominations being received by close of nominations.
       If there is insufficient time for a preselection prior to the close of nominations, then any member may without repercussion nominate themselves for office, and all party members are required to vote for all such nominees in an order to be determined between the close of nominations and polling day but otherwise conducted as per the normal preselection process.
       [This motion spells out what is called for in general terms in Recommendation 25. “That intervention in Party preselections by the National Executive and state administrative committees only occur as a last resort, rather than a first resort, and then only in exceptional circumstances.” It modifies rule N.4 (b) (no time to hold a ballot) and abolishes rules N.40 and M.7(d). This motion does not modify N.4 (a) (“Admin can organise selection… when the call for nomination fails”).]

       3. Timely conduct of Preselections

       We request State Conference to extend the existing rules around preselections so that:
       If one year prior to the earliest date on which a General Election can be reasonably expected, nominations for an electorate have not been called, the local Electoral Council is empowered to conduct its own preselection, following the usual rules for a preselection. One month’s prior notice must be given to all branches in the Electorate and to the Administrative Committee before an Electoral Council can vote to conduct its own preselection.
       [This motion extends rule N.1 (b) which currently requires preselections to be called one year prior to elections but do not say what should happen if a preselection is not called.]

       4. Anti stacking

       We request State Conference to strengthen existing branch stacking rules as follows:
       All members must pay their own membership fees direct to head office. The only exception is for immediate family members under the age of eighteen. Members paying a concessional rate must provide a photocopy of their concession card with payment.
       [This motion modifies rules A.25 and A.12(d) which currently allow party members to pay for any family member, and for dues to be paid to branch secretaries or the local MP. Although the current rules have not been published, I understand that since last conference, Admin have the option to require documentary evidence of entitlement to a concessional rate, but that it is only used selectively, if at all.]

       5. Direct elections for Admin, General Secretaries, Presidents

       We request State Conference to implement the 2010 National Review’s Recommendation 11 as follows:
       The structure of State Conference shall be changed so that the following positions are filled by postal ballot of the rank and file membership of the party and the rank and file membership of all affiliated unions, with each constituency having a 50% weighting in the final outcome:
       – President, Senior President and Junior Vice Presidents
       – General Secretary and Assistant Secretaries
       – All elected members on the Administrative Council
       The ballot of the party rank and file is to be conducted by the AEC or some other independent electoral body. It may held concurrently with the ballots for the National President and Vice-Presidents when timing permits.
       The ballot of an affiliated union’s membership shall be held concurrently with the normal ballot for the union’s other elected positions, using the same independent electoral body, if timing permits.  Otherwise that union’s membership shall be balloted by postal vote concurrently with the ballot of the party rank and file.
       [This motion represents a possible and sensible implementation of Recommendation 11, “that the structure of the ALP National Conference be changed to enable the increased participation of rank and file members through the direct election of a component of the National Conference”, and extends it to the State level.]

       6. Union delegates to Conference to be chosen by direct election by union members

       We request State Conference to implement the 2010 National Review’s Recommendation 19 as follows:
       That representation at State Conference by each affiliated union shall be conditional on the union selecting its delegates to Conference by direct election by the members of the union, concurrently with the ballots for other elected positions in that union, using the same independent electoral body.
       [This motion represents a possible and sensible implementation of Recommendation 19, “To encourage the participation of more affiliated trade union members in the Party, that affiliated trade unions be requested to ask members to opt in to Party involvement (e.g. primaries, representing the union at Party conferences)”.]

       Reply
3. Ralf Kluin says:

   31 March, 2011 at 12:42 pm

   I think that since the invention of the ALP its Rank and file members (based upon my personal observation since joining in 1966) have been concerned about our procedural view of democracy. I suppose that as ALP members, examining a rational ALP procedural democratic process, we might consider certain principles based on the following three questions:

   1. Who should participate in decision making?
   2. How much should each participant’s vote count?
   3. How many votes are needed to reach a decision?

   Reply
4. Owen Hooper says:

   1 April, 2011 at 10:59 am

   Many members have a problem getting a copy of the 2010 Review,
   perhaps someone somehow could organise some copies for handout on Saturday, there may also be other material people should have, not everyone has a computer, printer etc. Owen

   Reply
5. Ben Aveling says:

   6 April, 2011 at 10:46 am

   Ashfield Branch passed resolutions 1 (Endorse the review) and 3 (Union delegates) unchanged.

   Motion 4 (Anti Branch Stacking) was passed amended by the deletion of the last sentence (photocopy of concession card).

   Motion 2 failed to attract a mover and lapsed.

   Two other motions were passed, one relating to the accountability of the executive and parliamentary party to the Conference, and one related to Branch Stripping. Text will be available soon.

   Reply

6. Pingback: Extra Motion – Rozelle-Lilyfield Branch « Our ALP

7. Pingback: An open letter to George Wright, and any other potential candidates for the position of National Secretary « Our ALP

8. kevin boyd says:

   15 April, 2011 at 3:13 pm

   last we discussed and voted the the motions with some minor amendments.
   I. Endorse the findings of the 2010 national review and demand the public known recommendations be implemented in full.
   II. Direct election by rank and file for all elected members of administration committee, General Secretaries, Presidents all upper house MLC and Senators. That the structure of state conference shall be changed so that the these positions are filled by postal ballot of rank and file membership of the party and affiliated unions with each constituting having 50%weighting in the final outcome.
   III. Union Delegates to conference to be chosen by direct election by union members
   IV. Anti branch stacking, that all members must pay their own membership fees direct to head office. The only exception for immediate family members under the age of 18. Members.
   All motions passed.
   kevin boyd
   secretary bellinger river

   Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ